okx_methods

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It does state the tool 'returns a complete method inventory, including basic descriptions and usage instructions for each method,' which describes the return content. However, it does not disclose any potential side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or whether the data is static or paginated, leaving some behavioral transparency gaps.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise, consisting of two sentences that front-load the main purpose and then elaborate on the returned inventory. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it appropriately sized and structured.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the simple nature of the tool (no parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the core function and return value. However, it misses an opportunity to reference the sibling detail tools (e.g., okx_method_detail) to guide users on when to use this listing tool versus a detail lookup, so it is not fully complete in context.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter details, and it appropriately focuses on the tool's output rather than inputs, which is correct for a parameterless catalog tool.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's function: 'Get all API method lists and related documentation supported by OKX Exchange SDK.' The verb 'Get' is specific, the resource is clearly 'API method lists and related documentation,' and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools by naming OKX and implying it's the list-level alternative to the detail tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage by saying it 'helping developers understand available functional interfaces,' but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like okx_method_detail. There are no exclusions or alternative tool references, so guidance is implied rather than explicit.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.